More about Movies and media from Nell Minow, who reviews movies each week for Yahoo! Movies and radio stations across the U.S. and in Canada and writes the Media Mom column about families and popular culture for the Chicago Tribune.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Devin Bambrick wrote to share some thoughtful comments about "Batman Begins:"

Rachel has assured me that you won't be as bored by this as I fearedyou would, so perhaps against better judgement, a young film-buffwearing one of his two Batman t-shirts (seriously) composes a bit of aminority judgement in the case of Christopher Nolan's Batman for awell-respected movie mom.

First, you advised those who enjoyed this to see Batman Forever. Ihave trouble seeing that flick as anything but a neon-tinged attempt,with the requisite gosh-wow starpower, to sell Happy Meals tosnotnosed children (I was one of them, I still have the entire BatmanForever set of Pogs). But kudos on the Frank Miller recommendations.I'm heading to the MLLL as soon as I get back to Portland.

Personally, I loved the 60's Batman work. The 1966 movie version ishilarious (if not maddeningly long--but I guess that's the sixtiesfor you), and I love Gorshin's Riddler--the absurdity is pitchperfect.

But Batman Begins is something different. It's something childrenshouldn't see. Sure, if we are talking MPAA semantics, it doesn't domuch in the way of swearing or bloodwork. It just wasn't made forthem. We knew that when Darren Aranovsky was briefly attached todirect. And the last action sequence is a bit of a yawn-fest. It'sclear Nolan's strength was in atmospherics, something you've noticedquite well in your review (and how cool was that Hong Kong set!?). Sowhen things get to exploding, it got to be boring. In fact, all theaction sequences were underchoreographed, stealthy affairs of quickcamera work. It was an action movie without the action. In fact,Batman Begins has more to do with Kill Bill, comic books, and martialarts films than any other Batman movie. Because seventy one milliondollars be damned, America just got fooled into seeing a movie aboutstoic philosophy, justice, and the very existence of superheroes.

When I stepped into my nearest megaplex, I didn't "check my brain atthe door." I don't believe in doing that with movies ever. But I hadto do something else I did with Troy and Lord of the Rings and StarWars. I had to gird myself with the understanding that this movie wasgoing to be told in epic language. Speeches would be improbable,themes would be drilled into our heads, and imagery would be clear andiconic. Batman did this. But here's the thing: it did it better thanany movie I have ever seen.

When I came out of the theatre, I told my dad "That was awesome. Soperfect." He looked at me, incredulous. "Really?" Astounded. Well,Nell, take it from me. Parents just don't understand. But afterreading epic poetry and big tragedies all year, it'd be pretty sillyfor me to call Batman on specifics. (why exactly did these Shadow catsneed Bruce Wayne? Why does a pretty boy from a rich family fight sowell in prison brawls with dudes who did way harder stuff thanstealing some Wayne Enterprise sprockets?)

I disagree with your villain analysis. While Batman surely had somegood ones-- Egghead, King Tut, Two-Face-- Begins put the focus whereit needed to be: the genesis of a legend. As for too many, I thoughtit was the screenplay's attempt (which I thought brilliantlyconceived) to complete the requisite ramping-up of a superhero in ashorter time frame. While Spiderman had his little wrestling scene andhis minor successes at the beginning, told via near-montage, Batman isthrust right into the main conflict--his training is realizing it'sbigger than the crime boss and then the Scarecrow. But really, thevillain is there to challenge Batman's mission. It's a movie aboutmorals, really just hacking away at the Batman myth and succeedingsurprisingly well in justifying his existence. What about society'srole in crimefighting? Is the superhero simply revenge? Wherein liesthe human aspect? The brilliant dialogue between Katie Holmes and LiamNeeson is played out throughout the movie (and thank God, not inflashbacks or overdubs! Enough is left to the audience. The onlypandering imagery is the repetition of Batman's trauma, and that seemsreasonable) We didn't get this level with Tobey's webslinger. We wereso busy mired in CG crap that we didn't get the cool discussion ofsuperheroism. And here's my point, finally. Batman Begins doesn't skipto what Neeson's character calls the theatricality of superheroism.Sure it does that fine. The gadgets are awesome, the icon-creation isriveting, and the imagery is absolutely beautiful, but this is aquestioning movie, meditative. It's a reconsideration, not a slickBurton-does-Planet-of-the-Apes style reimagining. But the Batmobile isslow and clunky, the action scenes don't deliver the Zap! Whoosh!Bang! we've come to expect.

Katie Holmes delivers the most important line (unfortunately she comesoff as annoying rather than passionate and wise like her characterdemands) when she tells Bruce that Batman is the real him and BruceWayne is the costume. Exactly! David Carradine's monologue from KillBill, anyone? Here is the thematic examination we need! And the themeof fear is so well executed, from the bats to the chemical weaponthreatening Gotham. In fact, there are hardly any wasted lines. Theyare all perfect comic book philosophy, pop art's intellectualism. Ifit doesn't have a huge "oh my God, that's so deep" ring to it, it'sprobably a perfect goofy quip from someone or other (probably Caine).I guess one really just needs to allow oneself to get into this stuffto enjoy it. It's the same with goofy martial arts flicks. The stuffis all discount Stoic philosophy, packaged for the stoner and thetwelve-year old. It requires getting into. Which is why I was whollyinterested while that ten-year-old behind me talked through the flick.But when I left that theatre into the blinding light of a June parkinglot, I wanted to be right back in that dark place with Batman.

Anyways, I'm sorry for completely geeking out on you there. Perhapsyou can forgive me with time. Oh and I really liked Cilian Murphy, butto each her own.

Here's my response:

My dear Devin,

I loved your email. I wish I had enjoyed the movie as much as Ienjoyed your discussion of it. Can I post it on my blog?

It seems to me that you raise three key issues, and I will addressthem sequentially.

The first issue is the origin stuff -- does it provide depth andtexture and context or is it some "are we there yet" distraction onthe way to the good stuff we really care about? We are basically inagreement there but you come down a bit farther to the left on thatcontinuum than I do. Yes, I am glad to see how Bruce Wayne becomesBatman, especially because, as you so Kill-Bill-esque-ly know, it isreally a story about Bruce's becoming his true self -- he is takingoff layers, not putting them on. And all of that connects him more tothe bad guys than to his fellow good guys. His attraction/repulsionrelationship to evil is part of what makes him such a compellingcharacter. You think all of that was handled better than I do -- Iguess I would like to have seen more choices by Bruce than the usualorigins-style stuff of here's your suit, here's your car, here's yourmartial arts boot camp. So, I appreciated it, but not as much as youdid.

Second is what for want of a better term we'll call "productiondesign." I'm a Tim Burton girl, which is why I liked the look of theMichael Keaton/Jack Nicholson "Batman." But I liked this one a lot,too (I grew up in Chicago and loved the architectural nod to my hometown).

Third is where we part company the most decisively. All of that goodstuff in the first category really has to pay off when he has hisfirst major confrontations with bad guys, and for me, that didn't workat all. I didn't think any of the villians were worthy -- I wantedbad guys as tortured and demented and unnervingly twisted as Batman isat his core.

Thanks for a fabulous email, which made me think more deeply andappreciatively about the movie. Keep letting me know what you thinkabout the movies you see.